Biggest/Best Band in the World by year since 1980

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Aardvark747 said:
Afraid to say MsMofo - it means the same here in the UK as it does down under!
:wink:



It figures !! You're gettin' me in trouble again ... huh, Aardvark !!
:giggle: :giggle:
It's cool, I don't get scared too easily ... anyway, most people already know and understand what it means ... so I shouldn't need to explain it !! But for those who don't understand what
I meant ... You can only imagine !! .........
:laugh: :love: :applaud:
 
Aardvark747 said:
No....the drooling is mine I believe!!!:wink:


I like drool too, Aardvark ... but if you want those ... you can have them!! I'm getting into these :applaud: lately ... Tell Stupid to stay
away from these :applaud: ... or else !! I'll have to :banghead: ...
No one steals my :applaud: ................ :laugh: :applaud:
 
ultraviolet7 said:
We agree that U2 has been a top notch act for quite a few years now and almost anyone will mention U2 to be in this category from @1990 onwards. However I think the gist of the thread was to mention which act could be nominated as "Band of The Year" based on the release of an album, a successful tour, exposure, number of hit singles, etc.

Well, if that's the criteria we're using, then Genesis are the obvious band to place in 1986's slot, regardless of your like or dislike for them.

Genesis had a number one album, were the only band _ever_ to have five Billboard Top Five singles from the same album in one year, had the highest grossing tour of that year, won a Grammy for the Land of Confusion video, was voted Best Band in the Rolling Stone Reader's Poll, etc...And there was one special week where there were ten Genesis or Genesis related singles in the Billboard Top 100! Quite a feat for an band that started in 1968.

Some things are just too obvious, so people skip over them. ;)
 
Last edited:
PopMartian33107 said:


Well, if that's the criteria we're using, then Genesis are the obvious band to place in 1986's slot, regardless of your like or dislike for them.

Genesis had a number one album, were the only band _ever_ to have five Billboard Top Five singles from the same album in one year, had the highest grossing tour of that year, won a Grammy for the Land of Confusion video, was voted Best Band in the Rolling Stone Reader's Poll, etc...And there was one special week where there were ten Genesis or Genesis related singles in the Billboard Top 100! Quite a feat for an band that started in 1968.

Some things are just too obvious, so people skip over them. ;)
Sorry but your shout for Genisis falls down on every count,namely that all the facts that you quoted only involve the USA.What about the rest of the world???
 
boystupidboy said:

Sorry but your shout for Genisis falls down on every count,namely that all the facts that you quoted only involve the USA.What about the rest of the world???

Why does it fall down on every count? All those facts were true.

In fact, I'd say that they were even MORE popular in other parts of the world- Britian, Italy, and other countries, where they had much larger fan bases. Combined with Phil's already popular solo career, Peter's rising solo career, the solid stream of hits provided by Mike and the Mechanics, and the one hit that Steve's band GTR scored, Genesis really were the biggest band of 1986.

They had the biggest tour of the year, arguably the most popular album of the year (It went straight to #1 in Britain, and stayed there for weeks), and combined with all the accolodes they earned, I think it's pretty safe to say 1986 was Genesis' year. And why not? They're a great band. They deserve a spot on this list, absolutely. Just as much as Bon Jovi or Journey does, in my opinion.
 
KhanadaRhodes said:

this list is absolutely hilarious. i'm sorry, i'm a big U2 fan, but they have not been consistently the biggest band from 1987-2005. to even suggest that no one else dominated the music scene for even one year in the past 18 years is laughable.

also, the police did NOTHING in 1985. there was no new album, no tour, nothing. how on earth could they be the biggest band when sting was off with his first solo album and tour? i will give you the beatles dominating the mid to late 60s, but this list really just looks like you picked your top five bands and just stuck them up there.

Did you happen to read my notes about the list I posted?

"The biggest band in the world or biggest artist in the world is usually judged based on two factors, global album sales of the latest album released and the concert ticket sales of that artist or bands latest tour. In general who the biggest artist or band is for any year or group of years should be based on that criteria, meaning an artist or group would be eligible for the title in any given year, EVEN IF THEY DID NOT RELEASE AN ALBUM OR TOUR THAT YEAR, AS LONG AS THEY WERE STILL AN ACTIVE BAND."

If you were only to consider artist who tour or release an album for a given year for the title of biggest band, then you will often end up having bands that, did not sell nearly as much as the band that had the title the year before being named as the biggest band which is absurd unless of course the band from the year before is clearly not a band anymore.

In addition, if you were to do a list of the most popular bands at that particular time and you decided to exclude bands that did not tour or release an album that year, then a band that only sold 200,000 copies of an album and played clubs would be considered bigger than a Stadium filling band like U2 or the Police simply because they did not release and album or tour that year, which again is absurd. The people who made U2 or the Police a stadium filling band the year before did not all of a sudden disappear.

Another thing is that it would be impossible to compare artist or bands who release albums and tour in different years. The standard I use once again is the global album sales and concert ticket sales for the latest album and tour done by the band. This allows you to compare and determine who is on top regardless of what year it is and who actually released and album this year or the next.

As for the Police in 1985, there is not another band who in that year had a combination of album sales and concert ticket demand as good as what the Police had with their latest album and tour from 1983/1984. The band with the title does not lose it until they break up or another band comes along and outdoes the biggest bands latest album and concert ticket sales. Of course, if one does not consider the Police to be a band anymore at that point, I understand and I pointed that out in my post before.


Now on to U2. You claim they have NOT been consistently the most popular band worldwide since 1987 and claim that the to suggest such is "hilarious" and "laughable".

I have plenty of statistics and facts to back up my lists, but I'd like to know which years and what bands you place above U2 from 1987 to 2005?

I did not randomly make this list up from my 5 favorite bands. In fact, only two of the bands would be in my list of favorites. I went through records from Amusement Business on the concert industry as well as album sales data from RIAA, IFPI, CRIA and other organizations which certify album sales for the music industry in various countries and regions around the world. I stuck to a basic criteria which I explained above and used the facts from these sources to create the list.
 
ultraviolet7 said:
Re STING2's list I have my objections since, as someone has very well noted above, it is simply ridiculous to state that the music scene has been dominated by one single band during the past 18 years. We agree that U2 has been a top notch act for quite a few years now and almost anyone will mention U2 to be in this category from @1990 onwards. However I think the gist of the thread was to mention which act could be nominated as "Band of The Year" based on the release of an album, a successful tour, exposure, number of hit singles, etc. U2 could IMV have made that category five or six times from 1987 up to now, but no more than that. Other bands have been in the spotlight during particular years in the 1987-2004 period like Nirvana, Oasis, Aerosmith, Guns 'n Roses, etc, the recognition of which doesn't in any way negate U2's standing in the top league during the said period.

Its not ridiculous to state that U2 has been the biggest band worldwide for the past 18 years if the FACTS support that conclusion and they do. My criteria compares all active bands, regardless if they toured in this specific year or that year, or not. Otherwise, it would be impossible to compare bands that tour and released albums in different years.

In addition if you only consider artist who release an album in that year, and your doing a list of the biggest artist in the world, then a small band only selling under a million albums and playing in theaters would be considered bigger than a stadium filling band like U2, simply because U2 did not release and album that year, which is absurd. The people who made U2 the number one band the year before did not suddenly disappear or decide they were no longer U2 fans.

When a band become the most popular band in the world, they can lose the title two ways a. They break up and are no longer a band. b. Another band comes along and has a combination of album and concert ticket sales of their latest release and tour which surpasses the album and concert ticket sales of the biggest bands latest album and tour. A band can't claim to be bigger worldwide than another active band unless their latest album and tour outsells that bands latest album and tour.
 
So, STING, are you counting Bruce Springsteen and the E-Street Band as a band in your comparison when it comes to 1985? I have a very hard time believing Bruce wasn't outselling The Police at that particular point in time, especially with the deadly combination of Born in the USA album sales and ticket sales. I know BITUSA came out in 1984, but the album and tour were going like gangbusters through the winter, spring and summer of 1985.
 
STING2, whilst you are here, do you know if the Japanese charts are still how they used to be in the 1980's. ie non Japanese bands would enter the foreign chart but never make it across to the main chart. Do non Japanese bands crack the main chart these days?
 
Aardvark747 said:


'Wheel in the Sky' and 'Don't stop Believin' were there 'biggest' hits in the UK I think. U can find them on a lot of soft rock compilations.

Oh and as for weirdo......KISS IT!:madspit:




:wink:

One only has to sell 60,000 copies of an album to get a Silver award in the UK, 100,000 copies to get GOLD, and 300,000 copies for Platinum and multiplatinum for each successive 300,000 copies sold.

There is not a single Journey album that has sold enough copies to earn a Silver disc in the UK.
 
MsMofoGone said:


Just because they were NOT big in the ENTIRE world does NOT mean they still weren't a big band in the world ... I still say Journey was big elsewhere in the world!! Another example is
like The Police were big in the ENTIRE world?? I think not !! The Police's Synchronicity Tour in 1983 did NOT tour anywhere in South Africa and people have chosen that group as biggest band in the world for 1983 ...

Biggest band in the world, does not mean the biggest band in every country, it means the band the has the strongest album sales and concert tour demand of their latest and album and tour. In 1983 and 1984, the Police were at the top. While the Police never toured in South Africa, most artist around the world have not toured there either, especially back in the early 1980s. U2 has only been to South Africa once back in 1998.
 
beli said:
lol Doesnt matter. I wasnt sure if you were being intentionally witty. :wink:

As for this thread, what about AC/DC? Where they ever mega anywhere else? They were huge here in the 1980s but I dont know about the rest of the world. I doubt the Poms would like em.

Yes, AC/DC were huge in 1980/1981. Those years saw them at the peak of their popularity. Their popularity plummeted though in the years that followed by would surge up again from time to time. Their Back In Black album has been an incredible catalog seller and in 2005 stands at over 42 million copies worldwide. They were never the biggest band in any single year, but have had a strong worldwide popularity in most countries around the world.
 
Back
Top Bottom